Call For Opinion on Database Updates

[ssk7882]

Eloise wrote:

> I too, keep a print out with me at all times. But then, I'm also a 
> Luddite. ;-) 

Yes, it's awkward, isn't it?  If anyone ever has some *books* they 
need binding, just let me know.  ;-)

But Cindy showed me a very neat database trick yesterday, Eloise, 
which might reduce the need for constant printing out.  Maybe I'm 
the only person who didn't know this, but in any case, I'm going to 
share it with you all.

When you go into the Ever So Annoyingly Slow To Page Through 
database, you will see an option for "Printable Record" at the top of 
the screen.  

Clicking on this doohicky gives you the whole database in list form.  
It is *scrollable.*  It is *searchable.*  It doesn't take a dog's age 
to look through.  It can be housed in its very own little window and 
then minimized or made tiny, so that you don't have it in your face 
all the time.  And then you have something that you can consult all 
day long while you're cataloguing, without the need for constant 
printing out.

<Elkins notices that everyone else has turned aside to snicker behind 
their hands at her>

Oh, be quiet.  All of you.  I *hadn't* known that, okay?  I hadn't 
even noticed the "Printable Record" function.  I'd been cutting and 
pasting the stupid thing into a wordpad each and every time.  It was 
a pain, and it took the far side of forever.  Hence my desire for 
*updates,* so that I could *write* them onto my printout.  You know.  
Writing?  You remember writing?  Like with a pencil?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Go ahead.  Mock the Luddite.

So.  Having realized that this option exists, the question now 
becomes: is it really worth the bandwidth for people to post to the 
list every time they change the database?

It does seem as if this policy will likely swamp us in "database 
change" messages, and I'm not altogether certain that this is a good 
idea.  Not only will it mean a lot more traffic on what has already 
become The Happening Place To Be, but it will also make it far more 
difficult for those of us with limited time (read: all of us) to keep 
up with our tasks.  In truth, the database is getting updated 
*constantly,* so I don't know if we really want to deal with the 
constant stream of announcements that would result from this approach.

There's also the problem that every new announcement brings a risk of 
a new Definition Dispute, and I really do think that we want to cut 
back on those as much as we possibly can.

So.  How does this sound: rather than announcing database changes 
every time we make them, we will instead try to make them all at 
once, preferably at the beginning of our respective days.  This means 
that although the database will be in daily flux, it should not be in 
constant *hour-by-hour* flux.  It also means that a day's worth of 
discrepancies will be the most that can accrue.

What this also means is that when people add new terms to the 
database, they should include definitions in parentheses after any 
new terms that they add, so that we won't have to ask each 
other "what precisely did you mean by X?" nearly so often.  

Does this sound good to everyone?   It would still allow those of us 
who like to keep a copy of the database on hand to keep our lists 
updated -- through either daily print-out or daily use of 
the "Printable Record" function -- yet it would also cut back on the 
time and energy that we need to devote to questions of keyword 
definition, as well as keeping the traffic on this list to a 
manageable level.  It would also be far more efficient should there 
ever come a time when we get a mass upswelling in volunteers (hey!  
It *could* happen, you know).  Right now we have eight people 
actively at work on this project, but should we ever get more, the 
constant announcements of database changes would get overwhelming 
pretty quickly.

So what do people think?  Workable?  Not workable?  Any objections to 
handling the database updates this way?

Right now, Cindy and I are trying to consolidate the guidelines that 
we've established so far into one Big Fat Document, so if we could 
agree on a protocol for database updates soon, that would be great.


Elkins